I think Irvine deserves better. Another tin box like the town centre.. What this extremely important site in the historic core of Irvine needs is quality modern architecture which compliments the adjacent listed building and historic centre.

Agreed absolutely Roan. What a complete let down and poor response to the brilliant work done by IDC in the past

LA Architects are based in Sussex. I googled them after being thoroughly underwhelmed by the posted images above. They do a lot of leisure centres and there is some decent stuff on their website so maybe one has to ask about the brief, budget and ambition of the Council. If these images truly reflect what's planned them somebody in the client body wants to take a look at LA Architect's website and tell the architect that they can do better and that Irvine deserves better.

Doonfooter, the architects must accept some blame for the design. The site is in the heart of a 1,000 year old burgh, which has developed over the centuries with narrow plot widths. If you must build over the equivalent of 5-6 buildings, you must so do with a lot more skill than LA have shown here. Perversely, and this may be down to their incompetent brief by North Ayrshire Council, a new square is inserted into the historic line of he High Street. This totally screws up the rhythm of that street and destroys the setting of the beautiful Grecian-style 1859 Townhouse (whose visual impact depends partly on the buildings on either side of it being on the heel of the pavement, so that the slight setback of the civic building gives it a prominence in the street).

Crawford, I agree with you 100% and you clearly know Irvine. I am sure the Council as the client body will have employed all manner of project managers and in-house consultants to progress this project. I am simply suggesting that as the client who is paying for this it is beholden on the Council to ensure they not only get good value for money but that they get a quality, site specific building which delivers a carefully and properly considered response to brief. Each stakeholder has a duty to question the architect's response to this brief. No stakeholder should expect to hide behind the "its all the nasty architect's fault and there was nothing we could do about it, honest!". The design should be questioned and appraised by all bodies involved at each stage both to challenge the design team and ensure that the end product delivers and enhances Irvine's public realm. Questions should be asked of the design and unless the client is 100% happy the design team should up their game. There is no excuse for meakly accepting the mediocre and each stakeholder has a part to play.

I take your points, Doonfooter. I am an Irvinite who studied Town Planning with a view to 'getting my own back' on a profession which the Irvine Development Corporation gave me cause to despise. I don't blame the architect alone, I have far greater contempt for North Ayrshire Council and Irvine Bay Regeneration Company (which is led by a guy with the visual acuity of the late Ray Charles). The Council, as far as I am aware, have no trained designers in their planning team. The role of Historic Scotland in this is also open to question (the scheme is in the centre of a conservation area, it affects the setting of several listed buildings and will lead to the demolition of 2 listed properties, including a much loved primary school (now a busy community centre) which was built in 1845).

A debate is raging locally at the moment:

http://www.facebook.com/pages/Irvine-Action/288485464506187

A major flaw in all this is the lack of transparency - the 'public' consultations were with the architects (who apparently did not respond to letters from the town), NAC ducked out of this. The proposed demolition works were not adequately advertised at the time of the Listed Building Consent application (on this point, when I worked in Glasgow City Council we would not have accepted an application for demolition without a full planning application for the site's redevelopment). The whole thing has an even nastier taste as NAC are voting tomorrow on buying the Townhouse and adjacent land for £1 from the Common Good. This sale will end funding for the town's popular Marymass Festival (which receives its funding from the Common Good). The District Valuer gave, as his reason for this valuation, that it would cost £3.7m to repair the building. A Listed Building in community ownership would attract grant aid, this is not mentioned in then report of the valuation.

If there is a sharp decline in the amount of people using/demanding the sevice of a lesuire centre, why go to the expence (£17.3 million) of building another?? Never mind what an ugly eyesore it would be!
And I can't understand how the townhouse and adjacent land can be bought for just £1??!! Can someone explain this to me? If land is so cheap i'd build a house on acres of land and live in a mansion like a queen!!

This is just typical of North Ayrshire Council. The proposed new Magnum will look utterly hideous at the proposed site. If the current magnum is not being used to its full capacity the surely it should be up to north Ayrshire Council to do its utmost to promote the use of the Magnum. I agree with Amanda, why go to the expense of building another? North Ayrshire Council appear to have a heck of a lot of money to burn. The old Dreghorn Primary School was reported to cost £1.9million to repair which they couldn't afford but yet they managed to build the new Primary School which opened a couple of weeks ago at a cost of £9million with no pick up / drop off facilities for parents and children who are too lazy to walk the short distance to school.
NAC need to find out why the existing Magnum is being underused and must try to encourage more people to use it, rather than build this new Magnum that looks so out of place.

The building of a new leisure centre is something IRVINE town centre can do without.There is at least a ten million pound saving by revamping the MAGNUM now.Bringing money into the town,rubbish,an ENGLISH firm are building it,with BELGIAN metal and DUTCH wood?! The road system will need to be revamped,as the town is gridlocked most days between 3.30pm and 6.oopm.With the expected 5000 people per day using the new centre and visiting the town house to see IRVINE artifax,walking 500 yards to a carpark that will probably take 15 to 20 minutes to get out of,after crossing two roads with children.I am quite glad I will be to old to use it by the time it's built.On money,safety,pollution and common sense, JUST SPEND MONEY AND MAKE THE MAGNUM A PLACE TO BE PROUD OF.

The current Magnum is a beautiful building on a wonderful site and holds happy memories for many. I, for one, am sick of this 'throw away' mentality that seems so prevalent these days. Spend a little money on restoring the fabulous original Magnum and watch the people come back in their hordes! Had money been spent on the upkeep of the present facilities over the years, this situation would not have occurred. No doubt if the new centre is built, insufficient funds will be spent on its upkeep and new plans to replace it will appear in 40 years' time. We need to look after and cherish our splendid buildings, not demolish and replace!

I just don't know how its going to fit into the town centre. There just doesn't seem to be room where the old police station is and there surely cannot be enough room for sufficient parking spaces. Irvine is falling to pieces so perhaps spend some of the money on repairing this!

Why not build a 'new' Magnum at the old Volvo site? Plenty of space for everything the town requires, parking would be ample maybe even room for a shop or two? And it's on the bus route.